From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: About Guile crypto support Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:21:47 +0100 Message-ID: <878v6yojxg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1359896146.2754.19.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871ucvof60.fsf@gnu.org> <1360032192.2754.61.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <87mwvisqwj.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360340533 15960 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2013 16:22:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 16:22:13 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 08 17:22:32 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qie-00005v-2m for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:22:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49634 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qiL-00038S-6U for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 11:22:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34991) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qiF-00036w-F9 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 11:22:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qi9-0001Dt-KO for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 11:22:07 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:52597) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qi9-0001DY-De for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 11:22:01 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U3qiO-0008Hr-Pa for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:22:16 +0100 Original-Received: from 193.50.110.135 ([193.50.110.135]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:22:16 +0100 Original-Received: from ludo by 193.50.110.135 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Feb 2013 17:22:16 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 43 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.50.110.135 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 20 =?utf-8?Q?Pluvi=C3=B4se?= an 221 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.130005 (Ma Gnus v0.5) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:nrWrJGtuMvrWJ+KdwK9Zh3nuGYw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15707 Archived-At: Daniel Hartwig skribis: > On 5 February 2013 23:48, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >>> The gcrypt-guile project is doing so, I'll help it if I can. >>> But my original thought is orthogonal with gcrypt-guile, just put some >>> common digest algorithm in libguile rather than a full-stack crypto-lib. >> >> We could actually use the Gnulib crypto modules. There’s a >> duplication/convenience trade-off: we’d provide useful functionality by >> default, at the expense of duplicating C code in our tarballs (2500 SLOC >> for Gnulib’s sha*.[ch] and md5.[ch].) >> >> Opinions? > > Avoiding duplication and feature creep /in the core/ is highly > desirable. Guildhall makes it convenient enough to pull in additional > features; guile-lib has md5 and industria provides also sha and > others. Scheme implementations of these would be impractical in many cases (too slow). > A small core with addons has some obvious benefits, for the platform. > Maintainers may disagree, though I notice that historic choices to > include some modules (such as sxml, web) in the core were made before > the advent of Guildhall. I wonder where these modules would reside if > they were introduced in the current situation …? Some modules were deliberately moved from guile-lib to Guile to improve integration, and to come with more standard APIs by default. I’m not sure that having guildhall changes much in that respect. >> I think I’d be more inclined to have good bindings in libgcrypt proper, > > Yes, this solution will have many benefits. The currently available > bindings are, well, not so great. However, the API is small enough > that building a proper set will not take much effort. Yeah, apparently there are several half-baked bindings around. Let’s just polish one of them, and submit it for inclusion in libgcrypt. Ludo’.